Excursion - King of SUVs 2000 - 2005 Ford Excursion
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

V-6 Eco Boost swap into an Ex (someone please try it))

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #31  
Old 10-09-2013, 11:49 AM
CgAm2Lv's Avatar
CgAm2Lv
CgAm2Lv is offline
New User
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 6
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Going stricly by the computer on the X I'm getting 9 mpg! But this is my first tank of gas in it...I just got it. It's a pretty sick love affair though!
 
  #32  
Old 10-09-2013, 11:50 AM
rch10007's Avatar
rch10007
rch10007 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Clarksville, TN
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Splash67
LOL...from the title of the thread I thought this was a joke...
+1 That's why I'm staying out of this one...
 
  #33  
Old 10-09-2013, 12:28 PM
LivingLarge's Avatar
LivingLarge
LivingLarge is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 26,410
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by CgAm2Lv
If they release a crate motor version of the EB, I will be doing this swap. I love my X and will happily replace the engine when my v10 gives up...unless they bring the X back...then I might opt for a new one!
If you maintain the v10, only use ford filters, coolant and the motorcraft blend oil... It make take you forever before doing a swap!
 
  #34  
Old 10-09-2013, 08:42 PM
mgraveman's Avatar
mgraveman
mgraveman is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Tom
So out of curiosity, what makes you think that the EB is going to be less efficient than the V10? Can you provide an example of a larger engine providing better fuel economy than a smaller one?

I like this thread though, this stuff is interesting!
Typically bigger engines with more torque kept to low RPM and low load are more efficient than smaller engines that run higher speeds.

As an example: my 1970 impala with the 400 small block, turbo 400 transmission, 2.37 rear end, and 2 barrel carb will fetch 15-16 MPG on the highway at 70-75 MPH. That's a big car with a big engine and no overdrive.
 
  #35  
Old 10-09-2013, 08:50 PM
Tom's Avatar
Tom
Tom is online now
Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Isanti, MN
Posts: 25,431
Received 672 Likes on 441 Posts
Originally Posted by mgraveman
Typically bigger engines with more torque kept to low RPM and low load are more efficient than smaller engines that run higher speeds.

As an example: my 1970 impala with the 400 small block, turbo 400 transmission, 2.37 rear end, and 2 barrel carb will fetch 15-16 MPG on the highway at 70-75 MPH. That's a big car with a big engine and no overdrive.
That old Impala was actually set up better than most with overdrive transmissions! The next big thing in heavy trucks are direct-drive transmissions with super tall gearing; this keeps driveshaft speed down while still putting the engine in the proper RPM range for cruising. Some claim significant efficiency benefits by doing this, I wonder how long it is until this is looked at by light-duty manufacturers.

And, interestingly enough, that little V6 only makes 5 ft-lbs less than the V10 does, and it has an even better torque curve for towing. I used my truck to tow home a minivan for my mother-in-law; total trailer weight was over 9,000 lbs and I never got over 3,000 RPMs the entire trip. It was 52 miles each way with 40 of them being interstate. I hold lower RPMs with this thing than I did with my Excursion!
 
  #36  
Old 10-09-2013, 09:25 PM
AlaskanEx's Avatar
AlaskanEx
AlaskanEx is offline
Bleed Ford Blue

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Anchorage Alaska
Posts: 13,574
Received 128 Likes on 43 Posts
Originally Posted by Tom
I hold lower RPMs with this thing than I did with my Excursion!
Tom, you know as well as i do the V10 was never meant to hold low RPM's...when you want/need TQ you gotta run it up there, that's how it was designed. the V10 loves to sing along at 5,000 RPM.

btw, i was able to drive our new sales truck set up much like yours...your going to say i'm crazy but i was no impressed. i think maybe i expected to much? idk. it did lug around pretty good though.
 
  #37  
Old 10-09-2013, 10:23 PM
Technologiq's Avatar
Technologiq
Technologiq is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The EcoBoost is mated with an F-150 for a very simple reason.

It's basically a Taurus with a bed.

The EcoBoost will never end up in a REAL truck. Just because I can tow a sack of potatoes with my daughters Powerwheels Jeep doesn't mean it's a decent tow vehicle.



(Full disclosure: I'm kidding and if the Atlas comes out with a EcoBoost, I'll buy it)
 
  #38  
Old 10-10-2013, 01:19 AM
rockcrawler_101's Avatar
rockcrawler_101
rockcrawler_101 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would rather see the new dodge 3.0 diesel swapped in. That would a cool to see or the new cummins coming in the titan.
 
  #39  
Old 10-10-2013, 05:44 AM
acf6's Avatar
acf6
acf6 is offline
Post Fiend

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Manchester, CT
Posts: 13,710
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
I'd rather just keep driving my 6.0 that weighs 8000lbs and gets 19 mpg Highway and 15 city. ...
 
  #40  
Old 10-10-2013, 09:34 PM
Stebs's Avatar
Stebs
Stebs is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern KS
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by acf6
I'd rather just keep driving my 6.0 that weighs 8000lbs and gets 19 mpg Highway and 15 city. ...
AMEN!!
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Bruker
2011 to 2019 Explorer
17
05-30-2012 08:47 PM
Robb M.
2009 - 2014 F150
112
01-31-2011 05:41 PM
KC8QVO
1999 to 2016 Super Duty
17
08-10-2008 11:00 AM
96greenbronco
Alternative Fuels, Hybrids & Mileage
1
12-07-2004 10:06 PM
ItsReallyDarren
General Automotive Discussion
6
07-19-2004 08:30 PM



Quick Reply: V-6 Eco Boost swap into an Ex (someone please try it))



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:26 AM.